No

The need for reliable financial information has led to the establishment of audits as a vital component of corporate governance. Audits serve to enhance the credibility of financial statements, mitigate agency conflicts, and instill trust among stakeholders. In an evolving business landscape, external factors such as covid, war, and climate change have emerged, potentially impacting the determinants of audit fees. Purpose: The main objective of this thesis is to investigate the influence of external risk factors such as the covid pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine war, and climate change on audit fees. Theoretical perspectives: Theoretical concepts base on previous research and publications on determinants of audit fees, audit risk, the covid pandemic, Russia-Ukraine war, and climate change. Literature was used to derive the research gap and research questions. Methodology: A qualitative method base exploratory approach. A literature review was conducted to uncover areas of interest that require more research. The influence of external risk on the audit fees was identified as a potential area for research; a focus on the covid pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine war, and climate change. The research is based on semi-structured interviews with auditors from big four audit firms in Sweden. Empirical foundation: Six auditors from various professional levels participated in the interview process to obtain empirical data. Conclusions: The findings of the study show that covid, Russia-Ukraine war, and climate change have significant implications on audit fees. These external factors contribute to increased complexity and risk in the audit process, necessitating additional resources and effort leading to increase in audit fees. Recognizing the influence of COVID-19, war, and climate change on audit fees is crucial for auditors, audit clients, policymakers, and regulators. This awareness can inform decision-making processes, financial planning, risk assessments, and the development of appropriate regulatory frameworks, ultimately promoting transparency and strengthening the overall integrity of the audit process. The findings contribute to the existing body of knowledge and serve as a foundation for further exploration and understanding of the complex relationship between these external factors and audit fees.

Since the end of the Cold War, security and security threats have transcended beyond the traditional security aspects due to changed global interactions in the facets of economic, political, diplomatic and even domestic policies of individual states. The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine has not only heightened defence and security concerns in Europe and globally but has also revived the Cold War security tensions in some way necessitating an understanding of how contemporary security threats and crisis preparedness are perceived by civilians in this modern day and age.  Building from Ontological Security theory which holds that when an individual's sense of self and stability is challenged, they experience enormous anxiety, this study examines the attitudes and perceptions of the youths (many of whom were born and raised in the post-Cold War era) on security threats as well as their knowledge and trust in the government's civil defence and crisis preparedness in Växjö, Sweden. The study's analysis concludes that, despite being barely informed on civil defence crisis preparedness, Växjö's youths regard the ongoing war in Ukraine as less threatening to their ontological security but rather other human security issues due to factors like the war's narrative bearing little relevance, youth's media scepticism and refraining from negative news. Furthermore, the findings present a dramatic range of trust among the youths in the government's competence to handle emergencies, reflecting on crisis preparedness knowledge among the youths in Växjö.

Background: In 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine and put the world into a state of geopolitical crisis, leading to severe negative spillover effects on the global economy. Corporations were compelled to respond to the geopolitical crisis, while some were indirectly exposed to the war and others directly affected, all corporations had to decide on their strategic actions. Thus, questions arise how and why corporations acted as they did. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore how corporations react to a geopolitical crisis, and further explain how they make their strategic decisions. The study adopts a contingency perspective to identify the fundamental basis upon which strategic decisions were made. Additionally, the study tests whether stakeholders’ influences can explain the corporations’ decisions. Method: This study employs a quantitative methodology with a deductive approach in an exploratory and positivistic paradigm. This is done to examine the relationship between corporations’ exposure to Russia, stakeholders’ influences, and strategic decisions regarding the Russia-Ukraine war. Data were gathered from annual reports and various databases, and analyzed using Spearman correlation matrix and linear regression models. Conclusion: The findings show that corporations act differently depending on their contingencies in reaction to a geopolitical crisis. Furthermore, stakeholders influence the strategic decisions in corporations indirectly affected by the geopolitical crisis, however, their influence is diminished in corporations directly impacted. While some stakeholder influences were found on the strategic decisions made by the most severely impacted corporations, other factors seem to ultimately determine the strategic decisions in the directly impacted corporations.

Abstract This thesis investigates Romania’s response to the Russia-Ukraine war, focusing on the discourse surrounding sovereignty, the limitations of military power, and the potential for diplomatic alternatives. The study critically analyzes Romanian media coverage and political statements to explore how sovereignty is framed in the context of the conflict and examines the efficacy of military power versus non-military diplomatic strategies. Through a qualitative content analysis of selected Romanian news articles and official communications, the research identifies key themes and narratives that shape Romania’s stance on the conflict. The findings reveal a complex relationship between national security concerns, historical ties, and international diplomatic pressures. Moreover, the study highlights the constraints and costs associated with military power projection and underscores the importance of diplomatic avenues in mitigating conflict. By providing a comprehensive understanding of Romania’s position and proposing diplomatic strategies as viable alternatives to militarism, this thesis contributes to broader discussions on international relations and conflict resolution. The study also addresses methodological limitations, including potential biases in source selection and translation challenges.

Användningen av cyberattacker mot organisationer, sjukvård och individer har ökat parallellt med digitaliseringen. Nationer har också blivit offer för dessa typer av attacker, som ofta kombineras med andra medel för krigföring såsom markanfall och missilattacker. En Cyber-Pearl Harbor (härefter förkortad CPH) är en term uppmärksammad av Leon Panetta som enligt honom består av kombinerade attacker som resulterar i mänsklig död, fysisk förstörelse och som lamslår en hel nation. Gazmend Huskaj använder sig av Panettas definition för utformande av ett ramverk (“DSLP-ramverket”) som är tänkt användas för att kunna klassificera en händelse som en CPH. Syftet med denna studie är att utforska om DSLP-ramverket kan valideras då termen har brukats de senaste 25 åren utan att en global definition tagit fäste, det är därför inte säkert att de kriterier som presenteras i ramverket överensstämmer med vad cybersäkerhetsexperter anser att en CPH är. Forskningsfrågan som utvecklades från denna studie blev följande: “Hur kan ramverket "DSLP-ramverk" från "Offensive Cyberspace Operations Targeting Ukraine: a Cyber Pearl-Harbor" (2023) valideras för klassificering av cyberattacker som Cyber Pearl-Harbor?”. En kvalitativ fallstudie genomfördes med en litteraturöversikt över termen CPH samt en semistrukturerad intervju där 3 experter utfrågades, vilket sedan analyserades via en tematisk analys. Som ett första steg för att besvara denna studies frågeställning applicerades ramverket på tre verkliga fall, detta för att avgöra huruvida dessa fall kan klassificeras som en CPH eller inte. Dessa tre verkliga fall var en attack mot en publik sjukvårdssektor i Costa Rica, ett TV-torn i Kiev, Ukraina samt dagligvarukedjan Coop i Sverige. Resultatet av valideringen av DSLP-ramverket var att endast fallet med TV-kornet i Kiev, Ukraina kunde klassificeras som en CPH. Den kognitiva effekten av eventet var dock inte förlamande nog att paralysera hela Ukraina, vilket gör klassificeringen diskutabel. Det andra steget bestod av en tematisk analys som gjordes på de tre experterna, vilket resulterade i skapandet av fyra huvudteman: Begreppets betydelse, Försvar mot Cyber-Pearl Harbor, Probabilitet och Kombinerade anfall. Följande slutsatser kom att dras i denna studie: Avsaknaden av en internationell/global standard gör det svårare att 1) göra upp om en gemensam definition av termen samt 2) klassificera en CPH i verklig kontext. Kombinationer av flera attacker och verktyg är en annan aspekt som understryks vid definiering av en CPH. Huruvida en CPH har skett eller inte varierar från expert till expert, och detsamma gäller probabiliteten för att en CPH kan ske i dagens kontext. Baserat på dessa slutsatser blir det svårt att validera DSLP-ramverket. Ytterligare forskning och data, intervjuer med experter och förtydligande behövs för att skapa en universell definition och därmed en gemensam grund att utgå ifrån. / The use of cyberattacks against organizations, health care and individuals have increased along with the constant digitalisation. Nations have also fallen victim to cyberattacks, often combined with other means of war like boots on the ground or missiles. A Cyber-Pearl Harbor (further shortened as CPH) is a term mentioned by Leon Panetta described in his words as “combined attacks that result in human death and physical destruction and that paralyzes an entire nation”. Gazmend Huskaj used Panettas definition in order to create a framework (“DSLP-framework”) for classifying an event as a CPH. This study strives to see if the DSLP-framework can be validated since the term has been widely used for the last 25 years, however a universal definition of the term seems to be missing, therefore it is not certain that the criterias presented in the framework is accurate to what cybersecurity experts consider a CPH to be. The research question developed from this study's problem became the following: “How can the framework “DSLP-Framework” from “Offensive Cyberspace Operations Targeting Ukraine: a Cyber Pearl-Harbor” (2023) be validated for classification of cyberattacks as Cyber Pearl-Harbor?”. A qualitative case study was conducted through a literature overview regarding the term CPH and a semistructured interview with three experts, which were later analyzed through a thematic analysis. As a first step to answering the research question, the framework was applied to three real life cases in order to determine whether or not they can be classified as a CPH. The following cases were an attack on a public health sector in Costa Rica, a TV-tower in Kyiv, Ukraine and the grocery company Coop in Sweden. The result from applying each case to the DSLP-framework was that only the case of the TV-tower in Kyiv could be classified as a CPH. However, the cognitive effects of the event were not crippling enough to paralyze the entirety of Ukraine, making the classification debatable. The second step was done through the use of thematic analysis on the interviews with the experts, in which four main themes were created: The meaning of the concept, Defense against Cyber-Pearl Harbor, Probability and Combined attacks. The following conclusions were drawn in this study: The absence of an international standard makes it harder to 1) conclude a common definition of the term and 2) classify a CPH in real context. The combinations of attacks and tools is another important aspect to highlight when defining a CPH. Whether a CPH has happened or not varies from expert to expert, and the same goes for the probability of a CPH occurring in today's context. Based on these conclusions, it is hard to validate the DSLP-framework. Further research and data, interviews with experts and clarification is needed in order to create a universal definition and therefore a common ground to start from.

The amount of open-source information – that is, data, images, and footage that is openly available to the public - is growing exponentially. With it, so is the number of citizens analysing this data to form open-source intelligence (OSINT). Using the 2022 invasion of Ukraine as a case study, this study highlights the motivations behind the citizen OSINT analysts who are uncovering events on the frontline and verifying significant amounts of data from such events. Through interviews with 10 citizen OSINT analysts – all voluntarily contributing to OSINT in relation to the invasion of Ukraine, as well as other major OSINT projects – this study demonstrates the motivations behind this growing community. The findings reflect a new era of participation and advocacy and are a demonstration of self-determination theory. The findings demonstrate citizens’ sceptic views towards traditional media but also, that with a more analytical approach, with improved transparency and collaboration there is reason to be optimistic about the future of journalism and audience engagement.